Two voices on the page discourse on a matter of topics in an abstract modality of writing. Waldrop meditates upon a new relation of word and narrative to create a spaceless space of presences and absences where these two voices dialogue. The writing is abstract and, of course, poetic and comes across as dealing with a kind of phenomenology of the body, of perception, memory, sexual differentiation, the gap between childhood and adulthood. As the back of the book says, Waldrop’s style of “gap gardening tries to place the margin, the emptiness inside the text.” Perhaps in a sense, where to go without a centre in the text? A centreless text, the free play of signifiers. Yet, even with a high amount of abstraction there is a light, near lyrical touch in the humanity of the voices. As abstract as their language is, the things they discourse and dialogue on are important domains of human experience and being in the world. Here, Waldrop emphasises becoming over being and the boundless experience of change within life. As He says “We must decipher our lives… forward and backward, down through cracks in the crystal to excrement, entrails, formation of cells” (11). And more so on this space and the voices, Waldrop plays a lot with gender significations, even as abstractly through simple pronouns as He and She. He isn’t so distinctly He nor She so distinctly She, they are more androgynous and remain with a space of the neutral. Much of the writing here does really remind me of Blanchot and Jabès, who I cannot doubt were two of her highest influences. Waldrop’s writing seems to exist within this state of the neutral. Reluctant Gravities is an incredible book of beautiful and abstract sentences that touch upon deep meditations of the human experience.
Her language use is very interesting too, bridging a gap between poetry, scientific terms, and philosophy. But she does all this without having to be on the nose about it — a lot of the writing has to do with perception and the changes within it. In an ephemeral world, can our perception ever accurately render the world, as it is rendered through projections of memory, impressions, and our experience of being? A lot of this is touched upon through childhood memories and photographs. Yet, all of these still distort the world through our position and perspective, is it possible to authentically see the world?
Also I’m curious if there is a sense of some Freudo-Lacanism here. Waldrop touches a lot upon the mirror stage and sexual differentiations I imagine there is some psychoanalytic symbolism working throughout.